Virtual world technology: a new way forward in teacher education
Yvonne Masters, University of New England, ymasters@une.edu.au
Sue Gregory, University of New England, sue.gregory@une.edu.au
Abstract
Teacher education has undergone rapid change in the last few decades, as has higher
education generally. One feature of this change has been the expansion of higher education
delivery via distance education, necessitating dramatic modifications in the way teaching and
learning occurs, particularly in the area of online learning. Early forays into distance
education delivered materials to students in print format and then progressed to CDs and
DVDs. Distance education (external, off-campus) students generally studied in isolation from
home. The advent of a more ubiquitous use of the Internet and also of Web 2.0 tools helped to
bridge the gap between off-campus and on-campus study. While more interaction is possible
with these tools, students studying via distance education still report that this method of study
can be isolating. There is also still a perception that distance education is somehow inferior to
the educational experience of on-campus students. Over the last four and a half years, the
authors have conducted several research studies to investigate the use of a virtual world, in
this instance Second Life, as a learning and teaching environment that can enhance student
learning and provide a learning experience that is effective and engaging. In this paper we
discuss several research studies conducted in two custom-built learning spaces in Second Life;
Education Online Headquarters and the Second Life Classroom and Playground on Australis
4 Learning. The studies examine different methods of using the virtual world environment for
teacher education including tutorials and role-play. The environment has thus been used for
both theory and practice. Data from these studies support the thesis that the use of Second Life
enhances student engagement. We conclude the paper with recommendations for future use of
Second Life as a learning environment for teacher education.
Key words: Virtual worlds, teacher education, student engagement, distance education
Introduction
The face of higher education has changed dramatically over the last few decades owing to
“the exponential expansion of distance education” (Peters, 2010, p. 9). Distance education
(otherwise known as external or off-campus study) is now a common mode of study around
the world (Beldarrain, 2006; Gutierrez, 2010) and Peters (2010) argues that the main reason
for this world wide phenomenon is undoubtedly due to “the unbelievable advances and
proliferation of information and communication technologies” (p. 9). Early on, distance
education was largely conducted through the delivery of learning resources in paper format:
indeed, at that stage it was often referred to as correspondence learning due to the delivery of
materials to students and their assignments to universities via mail services. With the advent
of a range of information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly Web 2.0 tools,
the use of ‘snail mail’ has become almost obsolete. Distance education students can now
engage in what, as early as 1995, Keegan referred to as “face-to-face at a distance” (Keegan,
1995, p. 109).
Despite the uptake of distance education as a mode of study and the discussions regarding
how ICTs have impacted this method of learning (Beldarrain, 2006; Bower, 2011; Buck,
2009; Hiltz & Turoff, 2005; Peters, 2010), distance education is also reported to have some
major challenges to overcome including high attrition rates (Moody, 2004) and the view that
distance education is a “second-rate, impersonal educational option” (Baggaley, 2008, p. 41).
Isolation, both geographical and social, has been reported as one factor of distance education
that impinges on student satisfaction and contributes to high attrition (Alston et al., 2005;
Buchanan, Myers, & Hardin, 2005). Overcoming the sense of isolation, and providing a sense
of community and social interaction for these students is an important challenge in distance
education.
Given the challenge of isolation in distance education generally, studying a teacher education
course in this manner presents institutions with an imperative to develop a feeling of ‘social
presence’ (Short, Williams, & Christie, 1976). Social presence is characterised by the quality
of interactions both between student peers and between academics and students (Dow, 2008)
and requires strategies that “effectively facilitate online socialization and engagement” (Dow,
2008, p. 240). In teacher education this is of vital importance because of the well-documented
nature of teaching as a relational act (Bauml, 2009; Goldstein, 1999; Hargreaves, 1998).
Teachers do not work in isolation. They need to develop relationships with their students,
peers and parents. They frequently work in teams and interpersonal skills are important. Oncampus students have many opportunities to develop these necessary skills for teaching.
Online learning needs to provide similar opportunities for the distance education student.
While Web 2.0 tools such as wikis, blogs, chatrooms and other methods of social networking
can assist in the development of interaction online (Guri-Rosenblit, 2009; Lee & Chan, 2007;
Peters, 2010; Veletsianos, 2010), the authors began researching the efficacy of virtual world
learning as a way of increasing social presence and engagement. Virtual worlds are “richly
immersive and highly scalable 3D environments” (New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE
Learning Initiative, 2007, p. 18) with a capacity for simulation and extended interactions
(Warburton, 2009) that is well suited to developing teacher skills. From 2008, the authors
have worked on four research projects on virtual world learning that have demonstrated
increased student engagement. Their findings have been supported in other studies and
(McKerlich, Riis, Anderson, & Eastman, 2011) have reported that the “days of presence
deprived online learning could be limited; virtual worlds have the potential to provide a rich
learning experience overflowing with presence” (p. 334).
In this paper the authors discuss how the use of Second Life as a learning environment has
been effective in engaging students and enhancing their learning. This environment has
helped to overcome the issue of isolation in distance education learning and has fostered a
sense of community among the students who have studied in this manner. The first section of
the paper briefly outlines the four projects and then the authors discuss the findings of these
projects in terms of three important themes: engagements and presence, enhanced learning
and opportunities for practice. They conclude the paper with recommendations for future
research.
The Research Projects
Project 1:
The initial project commenced in 2008 when Gregory began a research project designed to
explore the efficacy of a virtual world environment, in this case Second Life, as a learning
space for distance education students. The first iteration of the project had 12 participants who
self-selected to take part as one of their assessment tasks.
Each week participants met in Second Life for a tutorial. In the first hour the tutorial was held
at Education Online Headquarters, Gregory’s custom-built learning environment, to discuss
the focus issues of the unit. In the second hour, students engaged in a number of tours of
virtual national and international institutions.
A range of data collection methods were used including surveys, recording of online dialogue
and questioning. A pre-semester survey collected data about students’ existing computer
expertise, knowledge of Web 2.0 tools and of virtual worlds. The post-semester survey
explored knowledge and skill development as well as student views of the efficacy and
effectiveness of using a virtual world such as Second Life for educational purposes.
This project has been repeated in 2009, 2010 and 2011 with data collected from more than
250 students.
Project 2:
New projects were commenced by the authors in partnership in 2009 and 2010. In 2009 a
project designed to replicate face-to-face role-plays in Second Life, using de Bono’s six
thinking hats (Bono, 1985) strategy as the role-play, was begun with on-campus students. It
was then expanded in 2010 to include distance education students. This project was designed
to investigate whether face-to-face teaching strategies could be replicated in a virtual world.
The first iteration was with on-campus students to permit trialling of the environment and
troubleshooting in regards to any technical problems.
Face-to-face workshops using de Bono’s (1985) six thinking hats strategy were conducted
first and then these were repeated in Second Life. Observation by two academics occurred for
both the real and the Second Life workshops and all online dialogue (which took the form of
typed chat) was recorded for analysis. At the end of each workshop the students and the
observers completed a survey designed to ascertain perceptions about engagement (affective,
behavioural and cognitive). Data was recorded on a 5 point Likert Scale with a section for
further comments. Over 2009 and 2010 there was a total of 96 participants.
Project 3:
A new research project was commenced in 2010. This project examined the performance of
students, as measured by final unit results, across seven units and across a range of modes
including face-to-face, via a Learning Management System (LMS) and in Second Life. While
the results of the on-campus students in those units that were offered in dual mode were
collected, the data for distance education students has been the main point of comparison.
This has been a conscious choice given that the age profile of on-campus students is
significantly different from that of the distance education students: 83% of on-campus
students are aged between 18 and 24, compared to the same percentage being over 25 in the
distance education cohort (UNE Corporate Intelligence Unit, 2011). This difference in age
and life experience was felt to have a greater bearing on result comparisons than other factors.
The collection of both quantitative and qualitative data occurred through the recording of all
online postings in both the LMS and in Second Life and also via end of semester surveys to
ascertain student perceptions of their engagement and learning. The surveys also provided
background data such as student age, home location and computer expertise. 2411 students
participated in this project across 2010 and 2011, 199 in Second Life and 2212 in the LMS.
Project 4:
The final project undertaken by the authors in collaboration with five other researchers from
different institutions is part of an Office of Learning and Teaching grant. Conducted from
2011 to 2012, VirtualPREX (Virtual Professional Experience) explores the efficacy of a
virtual world as a space for students to practise their teaching in an authentic environment
without risk. Students are able to role-play teaching scenarios with their peers acting as
primary school students. All students are provided with roles to play, either on- or off-task.
The student in the teaching role has to teach their peers for a seven-minute period. Data has
been collected in the form of machinima (in-world video) capturing all of the role-plays and a
post role-play survey designed to ascertain student perceptions of the effectiveness of the
role-plays for practice teaching.
Findings
The discussion of the results of the projects is provided under the headings of the key themes
which emerged rather than each project reported separately.
Theme 1: Student Engagement and Presence
Engagement and presence have been identified as important in improving instruction
effectiveness (Tu, 2002) and enhancing student outcomes (Richardson & Swan, 2003). In the
2008 project and further iterations, the results demonstrate that “the virtual world of Second
Life is an engaging environment for the students” (Gregory & Tynan, 2009, p. 379). Many of
the comments in this research project were indicative of both engagement and social presence:
I had a defining experience last week when we sat down in that open-air lecture
space and I sat on one side and the rest of you sat on the other side. Suddenly I felt
lonely and, without thinking, got up and moved to where you were all sitting. And
then, I thought, that felt so real!
and
Since beginning my studies this year, I am excited again about learning. The
interaction with my groups and lecturers has been inspiring.
and
I know I keep saying it, but I am absolutely loving this course. :) And not just SL:
the entire unit is so well presented - for instance, I have heard your voice! It
helps avoid the feeling of isolation so many of us externals feel and the way in
which the information is delivered makes it so easy to learn. Thanks!
The de Bono research project also provided data which indicate strong levels of engagement.
Off-campus students, in particular, commented in a post role-play survey that:
Using SL makes it feel as if I'm attending a tutorial and it makes the lesson
more personal;
and
For an external student, you can feel very isolated and alone whilst studying. I
find that SL provides an opportunity to ‘pretend’ that we are all sitting around
a table throwing around ideas. I find SL engaging as opposed to chat rooms
and I love wearing a ball gown to lectures each week!;
and
The use of Second Life is a great way to motivate and engage students,
especially those studying off campus. I find that I am more absorbed in this
unit (and ICT last semester) because of the interaction with the lecturer(s) and
the visual stimulus of actually seeing the other students (avatars). In doing this
I feel like I am actually part of the University, being involved in a tutorial and
learning from others.
These student comments are representative of the majority of comments made and provide
strong indications that learning in a virtual world is engaging and that it also enhances social
presence. Several of the comments reported also indicate that the students were able to
articulate what it was about their experiences that created this engagement. It is hoped that
this will now enhance these preservice teachers’ ability to engage their own students in the
classroom.
Theme 2: Enhancing Learning
While engagement is important, engagement without learning would not be beneficial. The
authors recognise the need to demonstrate that learning in a virtual world is as effective as
learning in a face-to-face environment. Gregory’s early project suggested that learning was
effective, with all of the students scoring 80% or more on their assessment tasks. Student
rating on a likert scale also indicated that the students believed that their experience in a
virtual world contributed to their learning. Overall, 71.45% of students reported that the
Second Life activities supported their learning “quite a lot” and 28.58% reported the support
level as a “fair amount”. These were the highest two choices on the scale.
The de Bono research project also had students comment about their learning, not just about
the sense of engagement in a virtual world. One student, who had learned the theory of the six
thinking hats from listening to a lecture and also reading texts, commented after the in-world
role-play that:
The opportunity to use Six Thinking Hats strategies in a group situation to
guide discussion was deeply beneficial. It gave me a clearer understanding of
how to use the hats, and provided an insight into how it may be used in a
classroom (something that up until the Second Life session had eluded me).
Clearly this student had learned the skills for using the de Bono role-play from being in a
learning environment which facilitated engagement in an actual role-play situation.
The results from the third project, where assessment results of those who studied via the LMS
and those who used Second Life as their learning environment were compared, show strong
indications that the use of a virtual world is effective as shown in Figures 1 and 2.
Figure 1: Student Grades - Comparison of Second Life and LMS 2010
Figure 2: Student Grades - Comparison of Second Life and LMS 2011
Each year of this project demonstrated that students who studied via the virtual world
environment performed at a generally high standard of achievement.
The authors also separated the results for one of the learning and teaching units in the first
year of the Bachelor of Education (Primary), Masters had five tutorial groups of off-campus
students. Twenty of the students elected to form two groups who would meet in Second Life
to discuss their required readings and also their assessment tasks. The three other tutorial
groups (a total of 30 students) worked only within the LMS, using the discussion board and
meeting for an hour a week with Masters in the chat room. Masters had groups in both
environments in order to compare results with the skew of a different tutor being removed.
Based on the final results of all students (rather than task by task) the two groups in Second
Life performed significantly better than the three using the LMS as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Student Grades - Comparison of Second Life and LMS
Adapted (Masters & Gregory, 2010, p. 6)
Result
High Distinction
Distinction
Credit
Pass
Fail
Blackboard
n=30
0%
46%
46%
8%
0%
Second Life
n=20
17%
72%
11%
0%
0%
These figures suggest that learning in a virtual world is not detrimental to learning. Also, after
examination of the grades of the 50 students in other units during the same year of study, it
appears that learning in a virtual world environment had a positive effect on results, with
results in units where they used the Second Life environment being higher than those where
they were not in a virtual world. Indeed, one student commented on the effect of her virtual
world experience on her learning in two units (ICT and EDLT – Learning and Teaching)
when she stated that:
From looking at my results in other units, I can see an improvement in results for both ICT
and EDLT, compared to my other two units that had no chat option at all.
Theme 3: Benefits for Practice
The opportunity to role-play de Bono’s six thinking hats was clearly beneficial as indicated by
the quoted student comment explaining that it allowed her to understand a concept which ‘up
until the Second Life session had eluded me’. This positive response to a role-play situation
was also repeated in the VirtualPREX project.
Comments from students who participated in the VirtualPREX project depict the affordances
of a virtual world for learning to teach when asked about their perceptions of the role-play
activity:
Being able to consider unexpected occurrences within the classroom and
approaches in how they can be overcome
and
Experiencing a classroom environment without a classroom
and
I liked how effective the role-play situations was, and how it relates back to
teaching in real life. It helped me see and experience what happens within the
classroom with the students.
These comments demonstrate that the students felt the teaching environment in the virtual
world was authentic and that they were able to practise their teaching skills, including
management of, and interaction with, the students. This research project is discussed more
fully elsewhere (see Gregory, Dalgarno, Campbell, Reiners, Knox, & Masters, 2011).
Conclusion
Outlined above are several projects that demonstrate students feel their learning through the
use of a virtual world made it more authentic and engaging. Students have expressed their
feelings that it is just like a ‘face-to-face’ encounter. Many of the quotations above have been
replicated by other students throughout the 4.5 years of studying of the efficacy of a virtual
world as a teaching and learning tool. This empirical research has provided much data to
support the notion that a virtual world is engaging, but it has also demonstrated that students
who use virtual worlds as a learning tool outperform other students who choose not to. Roleplays have been found an effective means for students to understand concepts more fully by
being able to experience a ‘live’ interaction with their peers and educators. We conclude that
virtual worlds are engaging for students and they perceive they are learning in authentic
environments. Students are undertaking tasks that are being delivered in a virtual world, but
feel that it is like a real face-to-face learning environment.
Engagement is strongly emphasised in the National Professional Standards for Teachers
(Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2011) and recognition of what
promotes engagement should be beneficial in meeting these standards. This is an area for
further research as the students who took part in the Second Life research projects begin their
own teaching careers.
The VirtualPREX role-plays will enable pre-service teachers to practise their teaching skills at
anytime suitable to them. It is particularly useful for off-campus students where they are not
provided with the opportunity to role-play in a face-to-face workshop. However, this mode of
role-play requires other students to be available at the same time for synchronous practise.
VirtualPREX is also currently developing bots (non-player characters) so that the student can
visit a VirtualPREX classroom and practise their teaching with bots, acting the primary school
student where they interact with the teacher (pre-service teacher) who is giving a lesson.
While the results of these research projects are positive and indicate that virtual worlds are a
feasible alternative learning environment, more research should be undertaken to make a
definitive conclusion that virtual worlds are, indeed a new way forward for teacher education.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of the following: the UNE School of
Education Research Initiative Grants, which supplied funding enabling two projects to come
to fruition; fellow-researchers Barney Dalgarno (CSU), Torsten Reiners (Curtin University),
Geoffrey Crisp (RMIT) and Heinz Dreher (Curtin University) who are part of the
VirtualPREX team. Support for the VirtualPREX research described in this paper has been
provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian
Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The views
expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and
Teaching Council.
References
Alston, M., Allan, J., Bell, K., Brown, A., Dowling, J., Hamilton, P., et al. (2005). SERPS up':
Support, engagement and retention of postgraduate students - a model of postgraduate
support. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 45(2), 172- 190.
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). National Professional
Standards for Teachers.
Baggaley, J. (2008). Where did distance education go wrong? Distance Education, 29(1), 3951.
Bauml, M. (2009). Examining the unexpected sophistication of preservice teachers’ beliefs
about the relational dimensions of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6),
902-908.
Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster
student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139-153.
Bono, E. d. (1985). Six Thinking Hats. London: Penguin Books.
Bower, M. (2011). Synchronous collaboration competencies in web‐conferencing
environments – their impact on the learning process. Distance Education, 32(1), 6383.
Buchanan, E. A., Myers, S. E., & Hardin, S. L. (2005). Holding your hand from a distance:
Online mentoring and the graduate library and information science student. The
Journal of Educators Online, 2(2), 1-18. Retrieved from
http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume2Number2/BuchananFinal.pdf
Buck, G. H. (2009). Far seeing and far reaching: How the promise of a distance technology
transformed a Faculty of Education. Journal of Distance Education, 23(3), 117-132.
de Bono, E. (1985). Six Thinking Hats. London: Penguin Books.
Dow, M. J. (2008). Implications of social presence for online learning: A case study of MLS
students. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 49(4), 231-242.
Goldstein, L. S. (1999). The relational zone: The role of caring relationships in the coconstruction of mind. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 647-673.
Gregory, S., & Tynan, B. (2009, 6-9 December 2009). Introducing Jass Easterman: My
Second Life learning space. Paper presented at the 26th Annual ascilite International
Conference, Auckland: Same places, different spaces, Auckland.
Gregory, S., Dalgarno, B., Campbell, M., Reiners, T., Knox, V., & Masters, Y. (2011).
Changing directions through VirtualPREX: engaging pre-service teachers in virtual
professional experience. In G. Williams, P. Statham, N. Brown, & B. Cleland (Eds.),
Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011 (pp. 491501). Presented at the ascilite2011, Hobart: Univeristy of Tasmania.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2009). Distance education in the digital age: Common misconceptions and
challenging tasks. Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 105-122.
Gutierrez, I. (2010). Global perspectives in open and distance learning and open learning
resources. Distance Learning, 7(1), 16-22.
Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education,
14(8), 835-854.
Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (2005). Education goes digital: the evolution of online learning and
the revolution in higher education. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 59-64.
Keegan, D. (1995). Teaching and learning by satellite in a European virtual classroom. In F.
Lockwood (Ed.), Open and Distance Learning Today (pp. 108-117). London:
Routledge.
Lee, M. J. W., & Chan, A. (2007). Reducing the effects of isolation and promoting Inclusivity
for distance learners through podcasting. Turkish Online Journal of Distance
Education, 8(1), 85-104. Retrieved from https://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde25/index.htm
Masters, Y., & Gregory, S. (2010, 8-9 September, 2010). Second Life: Harnessing virtual
world technology to enhance student engagement and learning. Paper presented at the
Rethinking learning in your discipline, University of New England.
Masters, Y., & Gregory, S. (2011). Second Life and Higher Education: New Opportunities for
Teaching and Learning. In P. Jerry & L. Lindsey (Eds.), Experiential Learning in
Virtual Worlds: Opening an Undiscovered Country (pp. 137-146). Oxford, United
Kingdom: Inter-Disciplinary Press.
McKerlich, R., Riis, M., Anderson, T., & Eastman, B. (2011). Student perceptions of teaching
presence, social presence, and cognitive presence in a virtual world. Journal of Online
Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 324-336.
Moody, J. (2004). Distance education: Why are the Attrition Rates so High? Quarterly
Review of Distance Education, 5(3), 205-210.
New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative. (2007). The Horizon Report,
2007 Edition.
Peters, O. (2010). Distance education in transition: Developments and issues (5th ed.).
Oldenburg, Germany: BIS-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universität.
Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation
to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
Networks, 7(1), 68-88.
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications.
New York: John Wiley.
Tu, C.-H. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment.
International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45.
UNE Corporate Intelligence Unit. (2011). Facts and Figures, 2010. Armidale: University of
New England.
Veletsianos, G. (Ed.). (2010). Emerging Technologies in Distance Education. Edmonton,
Canada: Athabasca University Press.
Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the
barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 40(3), 414-426.